xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: files in /etc/xinetd.d become 0 byte size

To: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: files in /etc/xinetd.d become 0 byte size
From: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:57:45 +0100
>received: from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1074957306; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:57:46 +0100 (CET)
Cc: Juri Haberland <juri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203190839410.19919-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3C97591 B.FF456D25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3C975DB7.4010201@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3C9760EA.3874D744@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1016554052.4383.4.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx s.sgi.com> <3C976ADD.FE0E7CDA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1016558028.1770.31.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3C978B5E.3040309@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1016565408.1770.93.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Steve Lord schrieb:
> 
> On Tue, 2002-03-19 at 13:02, Juri Haberland wrote:
> >
> > Ok, when you mentioned the SW RAID1 root partition I remembered that I
> > have a similar box sitting here. It's also a fresh SGI-RH7.2
> > installation with all updates and all partitions are on a SW-RAID1, but
> > on SCSI disks, not on IDE disks.
> >
> > I ran three test like yours (ntsysv (en/disabling time ; reboot)) and
> > afterwards I still had all files in /etc/xinetd.d with their proper
> > contents. I also had my .bash_history.
> > This box runs a 2.4.18-xfs-smp kernel from CVS, checked out on 4th of March.
> >
> > Simon
> > what about a recent kernel? 2.4.9-31 is user contributed IIRC. It might
> > not be a good choice...

You want me to cry, not a good choice, I have contributed them :-)
Serious, I'll try a newer kernel as soon as I can.

Just to confirm the IDE thing: I've tried the same on my home server now
which is SW-RAID1, but on SCSI disks, and it's the same problem. So
nothing with IDE and nothing with write cache.

What about sync? I'm still wondering whether it's good to have it in
halt? With my modified halt script the problem seems to go away.

-Simon

> 
> I agree with Juri on the try a recent kernel. And Simon, to answer your
> other question, if recovery is not reported as being run - then no need
> to look with xfs_logprint, the problem is the remount readonly code.
> 
> Steve
> 
> >
> > Juri
> --
> 
> Steve Lord                                      voice: +1-651-683-3511
> Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software         email: lord@xxxxxxx



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>